Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies

Well, I notice that xod's version also left no space for an argument and
had
it defined as a 0-level polynomial, so it wouuld in effect be the same
thing
albeit presented less clearly. It is also a 0-level mapping, i.e., from
the
empty set to the constant.

Would you mind giving a definition of domain? I'm thinking
of the set of values such that they are mapped by the function
to a value in the range. For example, the function f(x)=1
maps any real number to 1. I don't understand how a mapping
with an empty domain works.

<I don't see the need to put {zo fy} in the x1 place.>

Oh, it's just the first place you mind. Well, it is natural to say
"Whizbang
is the funtion from nats to nats such that...",

I notice you didn't write " 'Whizbang' is the name of the
function... ", i.e. you used the name, you didn't mention it.
Why do we need to mention it in Lojban?

but I agree that for any
other use this is a really bad choice. But, as I said, this was designed
for
introducing functions (I suspect it follows some computer language protocol
as well).

As I said, even for introducing functions it seems to me
like a really bad choice. And the English keyword is misleading.
It suggests that x1 is the function, but apparently it is not,
it is the function's name.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com